[Archived] Racist Chanting By "Rovers Supporters"

[RevidgeBlue]

Really??

I thought stewards were trained in ground safety not the ins & outs of racial law.

He only has to recount what he saw/heard! Not draft a complex legal opinion on the law!

Can a videotape give its opinion on the ins and outs of racial law?

[rigger]

now that Coyle hs left Burnley, perhaps that will be the end of that song.

[AggyBlue]

I think we need to re-legislate to make people aware of the distinction.

Due to the fact it's not considered a racist term anywhere else in the world and due to the fact that IndoPaks openly use the term to each other, does this in fact not make the legislation itself racist in so much that it only seems to apply to white brits?

[Mattyblue]

Due to the fact it's not considered a racist term anywhere else in the world and due to the fact that IndoPaks openly use the term to each other, does this in fact not make the legislation itself racist in so much that it only seems to apply to white brits?

Aggy,

Now you know that posts about positive discrimination and/or racism against whites is not allowed on this thread!

[broadsword]

It's a fair point.

If you're going to ban a word then it should apply to everyone equally. But you can't look abroad and say "they haven't banned this so therefore we can't ban it." There's quite possibly cannibals on the South Sea Islands, but I don't think people should be allowed to get away with cannabalism in this country.

If I ever have just cause to say the word "paki" I hope I'm not judged harshly. Can't see me ever needing to say it though, apart from this discussion!

I don't think it's too much to ask, to refrain from insulting people like that. I've never felt the need to do it.

[broadsword]

PS:

Here's how they do it in Oz:

[Paul]

Cletus I keep re-iterating that pakistan, pakistani, or any shortened version is not racist in itself nor ever should be. It is offensive in this chavvy song of course ... along with a munber of other words and suggestions, but please don't put misplaced political correctness before grammatical and factual correctness.

Using the term 'P word' instead of the above is basically reducing the correct name of that country to a rude or banned word and imo I'm sure is highly offensive in itself to someone from that country.

You've fallen into the trap now! The offensive words are the adjectives and NOT the noun!

And if you want to hand some sort of hollow victory albeit 30 years late to a tiny handful of 50 year old ex skinheads then go ahead cos I don't.

Oxford English Dictionary:

Paki • noun (pl. Pakis) Brit. informal, offensive a Pakistani

Cambridge Online Dictionary: Paki noun /ˈpæk.i/ n [C] offensive, a person from Pakistan

Wikipedia: (British Canadian, offensive, racial slur) A Pakistani, or, more generally and incorrectly used, a person who is perceived to be from South Asian or the Indian Subcontinent origin which is still considered offensive.

and

Usage notes (Wikipedia)The abbreviation Paki acquired offensive connotations in the 1960s when used by British tabloids to refer to subjects of former colony states in a derogatory and racist manner. In modern British usage "Paki" is typically used in a derogatory way as a label for all South Asians, including Indians, Afghans and Bangladeshis. To a lesser extent, the term has been applied as a racial slur towards Arabs and other Middle Eastern-looking groups who may resemble South Asians. During the 60's many emigrants were also dubbed as "black" to further segregrate them from the white community. Some would say such a division still exists in parts of England.

In recent times there has been a trend by second and third-generation British Pakistanis to reclaim the word. The word has been turned into a keepsake for the young British Pakistani community that is not acceptable for someone outside the community to say it, including Indians and Bangladeshis.

[47er]

now that Coyle hs left Burnley, perhaps that will be the end of that song.

I doubt it given the "intelligence" of those who sing it.

[cletus]

He only has to recount what he saw/heard! Not draft a complex legal opinion on the law!

Can a videotape give its opinion on the ins and outs of racial law?

So...... because the guy is wearing a hi-viz jacket, his word is better than Ohmi`s?? How do you work that one out? I used to wear a hi-viz jacket in my last job. It didn`t make me any more intelligent or better thought in the eyes of the law.....but a trained police officers views on the matter would certainly have more chance of being considered 'better evidence'

A video tape cannot give an opinion, but it can show what actually happened. If Ohmi was videotaped shouting 'Owen Coyle shags Pakis'.....then it can be used as quite strong evidence against him. If there`s no video proof, then Ohmi`s case is stronger.

[beerwins]

The world has gone mad.....It is alright to say mad isnt it ?

[cletus]

The world has gone mad.....It is alright to say mad isnt it ?

As long as you`re not implying that i`m mad. That could be seen as libellous lol

[beerwins]

As long as you`re not implying that i`m mad. That could be seen as libellous lol

Well I wouldnt want to tarnish the name of above mentioned poster so I would just like to clarify my post incase it was read wrong, you see mad was meant M.A.D Momentary anonymous displeasure but if this causes too much personal discomfort I will retract my post (statement).

[RevidgeBlue]

So...... because the guy is wearing a hi-viz jacket, his word is better than Ohmi`s?? How do you work that one out? I used to wear a hi-viz jacket in my last job. It didn`t make me any more intelligent or better thought in the eyes of the law.....but a trained police officers views on the matter would certainly have more chance of being considered 'better evidence'

A video tape cannot give an opinion, but it can show what actually happened. If Ohmi was videotaped shouting 'Owen Coyle shags Pakis'.....then it can be used as quite strong evidence against him. If there`s no video proof, then Ohmi`s case is stronger.

Sorry that's just plain wrong.

I don't know the specifics of the case but was trying to offer advice to ohmi in good faith.

It's not a question of who is more intelligent than the next person but IF the prosecution case hinges on the evidence of the steward it might simply boil down to his word against Ohmi's as to whether the offending words were actually spoken by Ohmi. Hence the need to cast doubt on his version of events.

Again I don't know what the prosecution evidence is based on but I would have thought that a video wouldn't be much use in this particular case unless it could both clearly pick out the sound and marry it up with a clear view of the lips of any individuals in question.

[Mattyblue]

Is there not something Orwellian and draconian about a young lad getting a criminal record, being placed on a database, banned from sporting events- maybe for life and possibly banned from certain places of employment just for saying an offensive word?

Even more so when you consider that a conviction could be based on the flimsiest video evidence or just the word of a part time steward who has no place in law enforcement or the criminal justice system.

[RevidgeBlue]

As to your first paragraph I'd tend to agree personally but everyone on here seems to take the offending chants very seriously indeed so maybe I'm completely out of touch.

As to your second paragraph I disagree, the steward is only doing his job and as far as the Court hearing is concerned whilst you can strenuously argue he must have been mistaken it would be completely counter productive to suggest he might not be acting in good faith or that his evidence doesn't matter because he is "only" a steward.

[broadsword]

Is there not something Orwellian and draconian about a young lad getting a criminal record, being placed on a database, banned from sporting events- maybe for life and possibly banned from certain places of employment just for saying an offensive word?

It's well over the top.

[thenodrog]

Is there not something Orwellian and draconian about a young lad getting a criminal record, being placed on a database, banned from sporting events- maybe for life and possibly banned from certain places of employment just for saying an offensive word?

Definitely. ID'ing him, warning towards future misconduct and chucking out should easily be enough. The worlds going mad.

The world has gone mad.....It is alright to say mad isnt it ?

Of course it is. Not a problem..... just as long as the word 'paki' doesn't follow it. Then it's punishable by the death sentence beerwins. Of course say it anywhere else on the surface of the planet and you'll be OK.

[thenodrog]

Thos dictionaries are taking rubbish Paul.

But I do find a certain irony in this.....

Paki noun (pl. Pakis) Brit. informal, offensive a Pakistani

Anyway if paki has indeed to be considered offensive in the future and accepted that every nationality has a shortened or colloquial version of their name of some description, then what do you suggest that we all adopt as an acceptable colloquial term for a Pakistani person? Pak or maybe Stan or Stanley springs to mind? Certainly no reason to be offensive or cause offenmse and if you Google those you will likely find no reference to skinheads or offensive english tabloids from the 60's.

So there you go I guess thats problem completely solved. Personally I think I prefer Stanley is the most appropriate.

[broadsword]

"Owen Coyle is a coot,

He shags Stanleys"

Suits me.

[LeChuck]

Cletus I keep re-iterating that pakistan, pakistani, or any shortened version is not racist in itself nor ever should be. It is offensive in this chavvy song of course ... along with a munber of other words and suggestions, but please don't put misplaced political correctness before grammatical and factual correctness.

Using the term 'P word' instead of the above is basically reducing the correct name of that country to a rude or banned word and imo I'm sure is highly offensive in itself to someone from that country.

For goodness sake, that's just all wrong. It is simply not comparable to 'Brit' or anything like that. It's a word purely designed to cause offence to Asian people, that's all it does.

From this BBC article:

"Its first recorded use was in 1964, when hostility in Britain to immigration from its former colonies in the Asian sub-continent, was beginning to find a voice.

Despite being an abbreviation for "Pakistani", its proponents tended to be less discriminating about its application - directing it against anyone with brown skin, be they Indian, Pakistani or Bangladeshi. Sometimes even non-Asians who happened to have a dark complexion found themselves on the receiving end."

It's frustrating with you because you're usually not far off the mark with your posts, unless they're about racial issues, when you suddenly get severe bouts of naivety. You know fine well that 'Paki' is a racial slur, but in your bid to complain about political correctness you have to conveniently ignore these truths.

[Paul]

But I do find a certain irony in this.....

Paki • noun (pl. Pakis) Brit. informal, offensive a Pakistani

I may well have edited out a bit of punctuation!

Aside from that if you want to challenge the Oxord English and Cambridge dictionaries that's fine by me but I think I'll just watch. Perhaps we could have an edition just for outer Blackburn?

[OhmiBRFC]

Thank you to people who believe me, and wished me luck. If I had done it, I'd not be as daft to post about it on here.

The only evidence is that of a over zealous lazy steward who picked someone easy to identify other than real culprits. Fortunately, there are several people who've said they'll testify - including people I don't know. They gave their details to my mate.

When this is done with, I hope I recieve an apology and the steward dismissed as it's causing a lot of distress.

[Steve Moss]

Picking the easy target is human nature. I could easily see a steward hesitating to go after an apparently rowdy, violent group, and instead target a 'lesser' spectator. He's seen doing his job, its an indirect warning to the true rowdies, and, best of all, his target might be the type to take it lying down. A win-win all around, except for the schmuck that takes the fall.

Good luck.

[OhmiBRFC]

He should be doing his job correctly when the consequences are so grave. Either the club haven't trained him to a high enough level, or he just isn't interested. Thanks to him I spent over ten hours in a cell and stranded in Wigan. Also have the possibilty of being banned from my favourite hobby. All because he couldn't be bothered to do his job properly.

[Steve Moss]

He should be doing his job correctly when the consequences are so grave. Either the club haven't trained him to a high enough level, or he just isn't interested. Thanks to him I spent over ten hours in a cell and stranded in Wigan. Also have the possibilty of being banned from my favourite hobby. All because he couldn't be bothered to do his job properly.

I agree with everything you've said. And if you have witnesses who have the spine to show up and testify, I'd hope that would cause the magistrate to believe the possibility you're innocent.